criterionforum.org

nicolas wrote: Tue Jul 29, 2025 8:41 amThanks for the context. I’m not suggesting that you made that point but after reading up on the topic, I still fail to understand how they were “entirely” canceled or why that even matters in context of their physical media operations? If the Valdivia Festival is the only one to reject MUBI films, with all due respect, it’s not that significant and probably won’t make them reconsider anything. After browsing the topic a bit more, it seems the controversy didn’t last that long in online debates either after the initial reports were put out.

I agree, I don't think the current backlash has been large enough to impact them in the long run. I think it's an important issue though, and just wanted to spotlight it a bit after rrenault mentioned it.

However, something that surprised me was that the festival rejection was apparently less than a week ago. Worth keeping tabs on to see if others follow suit.

rrenault wrote: Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:21 pm I thought Mubi's been canceled entirely as of two months ago. :-k

This is the first I've heard of it, so there are probably many others who don't keep up with the trades or social media and also haven't heard about it.

nicolas wrote: Sun Jul 27, 2025 1:24 pm By whom? They’re firing on all cylinders acquisition-wise and filmmakers, sales agents etc. are clearly willing wo work with them.

$100M in hedge fund investing can do that.

nicolas wrote: Tue Jul 29, 2025 8:41 am Thanks for the context. I’m not suggesting that you made that point but after reading up on the topic, I still fail to understand how they were “entirely” canceled or why that even matters in context of their physical media operations? If the Valdivia Festival is the only one to reject MUBI films, with all due respect, it’s not that significant and probably won’t make them reconsider anything. After browsing the topic a bit more, it seems the controversy didn’t last that long in online debates either after the initial reports were put out.

Boosmahn wrote: Tue Jul 29, 2025 4:27 pm I agree, I don't think the current backlash has been large enough to impact them in the long run. I think it's an important issue though, and just wanted to spotlight it a bit after rrenault mentioned it.

However, something that surprised me was that the festival rejection was apparently less than a week ago. Worth keeping tabs on to see if others follow suit.

Judging by the number of new Teslas I've seen driving around the SF Bay area this past week (including some with qualifying bumper stickers whose message is negated by the brand new tags), I would say that most people are fickle and often only engage in making "political statements" when its convenient to do so and/or suits their own interests (ie. being seen as a human with empathy when you work in an industry where it's important to be seen as having empathy). I wish I could say that I was optimistic about the future of such efforts from the enthusiasm/activism of those under 30, however the trajectory of the Boomers (from free love & Civil Rights to Donald Trump) has left me more cynical about humanity in general. On the one hand I understand the need for taking moral stands as a matter of principle, on the other I have seen such principled stands erode over time or under duress too often (with apartheid South Africa becoming the exception rather than the rule).

nicolas wrote: Sun Jul 27, 2025 1:24 pm

rrenault wrote: Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:21 pm I thought Mubi's been canceled entirely as of two months ago. :-k

By whom? They’re firing on all cylinders acquisition-wise and filmmakers, sales agents etc. are clearly willing wo work with them.

hope this answers your question. not to mention the hundreds of comments on their Instagram post stating subscriptions would be cancelled. and many of these are in Mubi's core markets, especially Latin America and Turkey, who have been on the right side of things when it comes to this particular issue

ryannichols7 wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 8:09 pm

nicolas wrote: Sun Jul 27, 2025 1:24 pm

rrenault wrote: Sat Jul 26, 2025 8:21 pm I thought Mubi's been canceled entirely as of two months ago. :-k

By whom? They’re firing on all cylinders acquisition-wise and filmmakers, sales agents etc. are clearly willing wo work with them.

hope this answers your question. not to mention the hundreds of comments on their Instagram post stating subscriptions would be cancelled. and many of these are in Mubi's core markets, especially Latin America and Turkey, who have been on the right side of things when it comes to this particular issue

To my defense, that article was only released today and while it’s definitely the most impactful act of resistance so far, I still wouldn’t say that MUBI has been “entirely” canceled as, for example, none of the films they licensed this year were rescinded by the filmmakers or production companies and the big European and American festivals haven’t (yet) banned them. It’d need a caliber of Cannes or Venice in order to directly impact their business and standing in the industry. But okay, I’ll leave it at that and to swing back to whatever all this means for Lars von Trier’s films, my feeling is they’re doing business as usual with their catalogue titles: Streaming only and select physical releases for bigger new titles.

nicolas wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 8:45 pm

ryannichols7 wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 8:09 pm hope this answers your question. not to mention the hundreds of comments on their Instagram post stating subscriptions would be cancelled. and many of these are in Mubi's core markets, especially Latin America and Turkey, who have been on the right side of things when it comes to this particular issue

To my defense, that article was only released today and while it’s definitely the most impactful act of resistance so far, I still wouldn’t say that MUBI has been “entirely” canceled as, for example, none of the films they licensed this year were rescinded by the filmmakers or production companies and the big European and American festivals haven’t (yet) banned them. It’d need a caliber of Cannes or Venice in order to directly impact their business and standing in the industry. But okay, I’ll leave it at that and to swing back to whatever all this means for Lars von Trier’s films, my feeling is they’re doing business as usual with their catalogue titles: Streaming only and select physical releases for bigger new titles.

yes, I just thought it was a very timely answer to the question. many cancelled their subscriptions and I follow quite a few independent cinemas who cancelled screenings of their films. there will be greater repercussions I'm sure over time. if I'm a production company, would I want to sell the rights of my film to a company that is outwardly okay with what Mubi is? Criterion, for example, has been silent (yet remain arguably the biggest booster of Iranian cinema in the west, are releasing their first Egyptian film, and have never released a film from the country in question), but that's a far more respectable decision than what Mubi went for here. I can't imagine many filmmakers will want to align with a company who takes a stance like that, especially if press conferences and media buzz is going to shift from "so tell me about your new film" to "why is your new film with Mubi?"

as for Lars Von Trier, all I can say is it seems like he's in the right place

nicolas wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 8:45 pm But okay, I’ll leave it at that and to swing back to whatever all this means for Lars von Trier’s films, my feeling is they’re doing business as usual with their catalogue titles: Streaming only and select physical releases for bigger new titles.

I guess that will be the case, unfortunately. Ideally, these titles could be licensed out to Criterion or another company for a boxset akin to Curzon's release. But at least we got The Kingdom Triilogy. (Speaking of MUBI releases, Drive My Car is OOP and the sites I can find have it going for high prices)

That letter is a big deal. At this point, it could just take one major festival not showing MUBI films for them to really need to reconsider.

Boosmahn wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 10:08 pm That letter is a big deal. At this point, it could just take one major festival not showing MUBI films for them to really need to reconsider.

of the European big 3, only realistic shot there is Venice. and that's actually not horrible odds too. such a thing would never be allowed at Berlin and Cannes couldn't bother to care

if we really wanna see something impressive, NYFF or TIFF should go for it. but nonetheless, those are some major directors and that'll make some waves big time

ryannichols7 wrote: Wed Jul 30, 2025 9:48 pm?"
as for Lars Von Trier, all I can say is it seems like he's in the right place

Ironically, speaking out against Israel before it was trendy (albeit clumsily) is what got him in trouble at Cannes.

No, I seem to recall it was saying that he identified with Hitler.

pistolwink wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 5:49 pm No, I seem to recall it was saying that he identified with Hitler.

Well, that was the clumsy part. The “I am very much for Jews; well not too much because Israel is a pain in the ass.” part that I am referring to, which at the time was not remotely in the Overton Window, and a good part of the reason he was ostracized, but is now used conversely as a popular reason to criticize MUBI. So yeah, without getting political, I find that an irony.

dwk wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 7:17 pm Eddie Huang Says Mubi Has “Shelved” His Doc ‘Vice Is Broke’ Over His Protest Of Company’s Ties To Israeli Defense Investor; Distributor Denies Claims

this kind of thing is huge. if they start cancelling projects by pro Palestinian filmmakers, like the ones who signed that letter, those filmmakers will take their films to Criterion, Curzon, etc...

Zot! wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 9:15 pm

pistolwink wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 5:49 pm No, I seem to recall it was saying that he identified with Hitler.

Well, that was the clumsy part. The “I am very much for Jews; well not too much because Israel is a pain in the ass.” part that I am referring to, which at the time was not remotely in the Overton Window, and a good part of the reason he was ostracized, but is now used conversely as a popular reason to criticize MUBI. So yeah, without getting political, I find that an irony.

Von Trier also explicitly said in a German publication (my emphasis is bolded):

SPIEGEL ONLINE: So the accusations that you are anti-Semitic are inaccurate?

Von Trier: I don't like Israel's Palestinian policies. But I am not Mel Gibson. I am definitely not Mel Gibson. I am the opposite. I have been to all these concentration camps and I think that the Holocaust is the worst crime in humanity. And I was naïve. Coming from Denmark, I thought this was some time ago and we should open up a little. This was wrong. It was stupid of me and I apologize for the pain I have inflicted on some people. If anyone would like to hit me, they are perfectly welcome. I must warn you, though, that I might enjoy it. So maybe it's not the right kind of punishment.

I'm sure this kind of statement would land him in a German jail now, moreso the support for Palestine than anything else...I would be curious to hear what he has to think. I certainly never heard this side of it, since of course the Hitler quote was taken and ran with. so I have to walk back my joke quite a bit! even if the general way he went about it is still a bit goofy

ryannichols7 wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 9:52 pm

dwk wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 7:17 pm Eddie Huang Says Mubi Has “Shelved” His Doc ‘Vice Is Broke’ Over His Protest Of Company’s Ties To Israeli Defense Investor; Distributor Denies Claims

this kind of thing is huge. if they start cancelling projects by pro Palestinian filmmakers, like the ones who signed that letter, those filmmakers will take their films to Criterion, Curzon, etc...

And yet, MUBI is the one service that shows No Other Land in Germany and all their subscribers would be able to see it if they have the technical means to access it. It seems there are different camps trying to steer this ship while they damage their brand at the height of their powers. A really sad development over the last couple of days and with the renewed attention on the matter, this will probably not be the end of it but if MUBI continue like that, they’ll be the ones canceling themselves over such foolish decisions.

Zot! wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 9:15 pm

pistolwink wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 5:49 pm No, I seem to recall it was saying that he identified with Hitler.

Well, that was the clumsy part. The “I am very much for Jews; well not too much because Israel is a pain in the ass.” part that I am referring to, which at the time was not remotely in the Overton Window, and a good part of the reason he was ostracized, but is now used conversely as a popular reason to criticize MUBI. So yeah, without getting political, I find that an irony.

That seems speculative at best. Nothing in the official statement from Cannes afterwards specifically mentioned his “Israel is a pain in the ass” remark as a reason for declaring him “persona non grata”, and the news coverage at the time was, if I recall correctly, focused primarily on his comments about being a Nazi and sympathising with Hitler. See this Hollywood Reporter article, for instance, which quotes some of his comments but doesn’t mention what he said about Israel: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ ... rs-189815/

As for MUBI, I only hope this situation continues to come to a head. They’ve chosen money over ethics, and that contradiction should haunt them. I was always fond of MUBI, recommended friends sign up to their streaming platform and thought they were fulfilling an important function in the film distribution space, but will never go near them again if they don’t cut ties with Sequoia. If this ruins their credibility and ultimately destroys them, good: let their fate serve as a warning to any company that wants to go down the same path.

spectre wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 10:31 pm

Zot! wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 9:15 pm

pistolwink wrote: Fri Aug 01, 2025 5:49 pm No, I seem to recall it was saying that he identified with Hitler.

Well, that was the clumsy part. The “I am very much for Jews; well not too much because Israel is a pain in the ass.” part that I am referring to, which at the time was not remotely in the Overton Window, and a good part of the reason he was ostracized, but is now used conversely as a popular reason to criticize MUBI. So yeah, without getting political, I find that an irony.

That seems speculative at best. Nothing in the official statement from Cannes afterwards specifically mentioned his “Israel is a pain in the ass” remark as a reason for declaring him “persona non grata”, and the news coverage at the time was, if I recall correctly, focused primarily on his comments about being a Nazi and sympathising with Hitler. See this Hollywood Reporter article, for instance, which quotes some of his comments but doesn’t mention what he said about Israel: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ ... rs-189815/

Isn’t it far easier to just label him a Nazi and move on? If people at US universities are getting jailed because they express solidarity with the Palestinian struggle today, then yeah, I don’t think Cannes is past the reach of AIPAC and their offshoots, especially during more innocent times. But your heart is in the right place, and I won’t belabor my point.

Not saying you're necessarily wrong, just that I don't recall that one single line being a stated factor in either the Cannes "persona non grata" decision or most of the wider reaction at the time, and none of the contemporary reportage I've seen highlighted it as the moment where he crossed the line. Saying something is "speculation" doesn't mean it's false – just that, in absence of compelling evidence, it's guesswork. The best we can do is a counterfactual: if Von Trier hadn't mentioned Israel, would he still have been sanctioned for his comments? I assume so.

Personally, I felt then and still feel now that Cannes' response to what he said was incredibly self-important, and I don't think any reasonable person could conclude from his remarks that Von Trier was an antisemite or had Nazi sympathies – it was obviously just a clumsy exercise in edgelordery that went off the rails, and probably deserved nothing further than a collective eye roll and perhaps (for his own good) an indefinite self-imposed ban on attending press conferences. But yes, fair to say these were more innocent times, and people in the public eye back then weren't routinely getting away with far more (deliberately) offensive and bigoted statements to the degree they are today.

Statement by Mubi’s CEO about the Sequoia situation. In short, MUBI won’t return the investment.

The new statement is less "nothing" than the old one, but it's deliberate in not ever mentioning the name "Israel." The closest Cakarel gets is condemning "the deliberate targeting of an entire population’s ability to survive and thrive." A user elsewhere said it's like his wording suggests the genocide (another word unmentioned) is "happening on its own," and I don't disagree. The tiptoeing around the issue leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

And while I'm no expert on this kind of funding, I fail to understand how some of MUBI's profits cannot go back to Sequoia, which can then go into warmongering companies like Kela? Cakarel says profits don't go directly to Sequoia's other investments -- who said they did? Profits go back to people at Sequoia, and then can go to companies such as Kela, as far as I know.

The policy and council are good, but the statement's lack of direct criticism and the refusal to return Sequoia's investment are very disappointing. The main issue is untouched.

I can't imagine it would be simple to just give the money back, as funds of that nature would evaporate quickly into Mubi's bloodstream when accounting for current/future debt, ongoing projects/internal investments, as well as the series of smaller investors expecting a turnaround before Sequoia even came along. Also, the 1B value of the company is just that: an estimation of the actual vs. the possible, and the shell game can continue unabated (remember Quibi?).

But for a 1B valued company, there is still little in their streaming that's unique and probably worth anyone's time, less so a 1-month free trial. And yet, they have 20 million users worldwide? For Cooper Raiff & Miguel Gomes movies?

So yeah, Mubi is funding genocide, but so is everyone else that lives in the U.S. and pays taxes

Sure, but one of those is a choice and one isn't. I commend anyone who doesn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good with stuff like this – if you can join a targeted boycott in one area of need, even if you may be inadvertently aiding unethical causes in another, then you're doing something to fight at least one of the world's problems. It's the only way anything gets done.

Thanks, just might have to try it to catch up on all the Kelly Reichardt I've missed (hopefully I can remember to cancel in time, or does Mubi play tricks with you like Apple & Amazon in making it difficult?)

It's pretty easy to cancel. Unless there's a free trial involved (not the case here), I usually sign up and then cancel immediately. The subscription will continue until the next billing date and then not be renewed.