La Cinémathèque québécoise

Collections en ligne

Ce site est rendu possible grâce à la fondation Daniel Langlois

Dossiers sur les collections

Cahiers des rencontres > CAHIER 1 : PROJETS ET RÉSOLUTIONS > Version anglaise des résolutions

Version anglaise des résolutions adoptées lors de l’assemblée plénière du 8 juin 1974 / English version of resolutions adopted during the plenary session of June 8th, 1974 : PDF

Table of contents :
> Why the Rencontres internationales?
> Workshops
> Third World Cinema Committee
> Latin American Filmmakers Committee
> Resolution of United States film workers
> Working document of the provisional coordinating committee of the cinema workers of european countries and Quebec
> A new type of critic for a new type of cinema
> Declaration presented during the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma
> Declaration Chile
> Communication
> Telegram
> Political resolution

Why the Rencontres internationales?

“The anti-imperialist struggle of the people of the Third World and of their equivalents inside the imperialist countries constitutes today the axis of the world revolution. Third Cinema is, in our opinion, the cinema that recognizes in that struggle the most gigantic cultural, scientific and artistic manifestation of our time, the great possibility of constructing a liberated personality with each people as the starting point – in a word, the decolonization of culture.”
— Octavio Getino and Fernando Solanas, “Towards a Third Cinema”, Tricontinental, No.3,1969

Historical perspectives

We have reached a turning point in the history of cinema. Cinema has existed for seventy-five years and we have only just become aware of its true role in the contemporary political context. In the beginning, we manifested our new awareness by questioning the actual structure of traditional cinema. This questioning became necessary because a type of institutionalization combined with compromises between financial and artistic interest had resulted in creating a cinematographic practice which was in conflict with our basic aspirations and thus in conflict with a true national and liberating cinema.

With the appearance of national cinemas (in particular, those of small film-producing countries and of the Third World), the hegemony of the large industrial cinemas was confronted with a new reality, that of a new cinema whose major concern was to establish a praxis which would assure its continuity.

Thus, in the cinema of our respective countries, a fundamental schism occurred between a “decolonizing” cinema and a consumer-object and a plus-value cinema. This conflict provided the base upon which we could build an authentic national cinematography and cleared the way for us to start searching for and creating new means which would assure the continuation of this struggle and at the same time coincide with a true national development.

At the beginning it was simply a question of breaking down cinema’s wall, of identifying certain realities and of working in a new praxis. This bringing of cinema out into the open also has had the effect of demystifying it as a cultural and commercial product.

It has happened that progressive filmmakers and technicians have obtained the means (production companies, modern equipment, skilled technicians, etc.) to produce films, but is hasn’t necessarily created a tool to help them participate fully in national liberation struggles. At most, a few have succeeded in bearing witness to some of their national realities and sometimes have gained an awareness of the meaning of the struggle.

But we must not deceive ourselves. Irrespective of our political options, regardless of how progressive they are, we are practising this trade in an economic market. Because we must work in this context, it is therefore necessary to plan a strategy which will enable us to assure this continuity.

Declaration of intent

Taking into account the socio-political and geographical situation of Quebec, it is essential for us to confront our experiences with those people who are working elsewhere in the same perspective and to reexamine the traditional cinematographic structures with which we are in conflict. It is important to see if, with resolve, we can elaborated together “transitory” mechanisms which aim towards a SOCIALIZATION of cinema and to see if an alternative Third Cinema is or is not viable in this context of change. Because, barring such a “transitory” attitude, it might be necessary to abandon any hope of transforming cinema in a profound and lasting way. In that case, we will have only to choose between permanent opposition (contestation) and/or our own management of capitalist cinema.

Consequently, the primary task of these Rencontres will be to make comparisons. Hopefully, this will prevent us from being once again trapped by our suicidal respect of institutions, which respect guarantees the status-quo of the present cinematographic system, hinders its transformation and prevents the existence of an Other Cinema.

Because of our different national political situations, we must prevent opposition groups from being formed around these differences and at all costs we must avoid political dogmatism. Rather we must utilize the contradictions of the capitalist system of cinema as a maneuvering margin with which to deal with this system. In view of this fundamental choice, the Rencontres do not want to shut the door on any experience. We would like these Rencontres to be essentially the comparison of strategies which necessarily vary in accordance with geographical locations, political situations, existing structures but remain aimed towards a common objective.

At this point, it is less a question of forming a “third force” of cinema (a sort of international of new cinemas united in diversity) as of assuring an essential dialogue and stimulating and making coherent our strategies.

This potential movement challenges us to specify and reinforce our means of action for a cinema which has a role to play in the historical process which we are confronting.

“The only way to make a non-standard production is to create non-standard conditions and to promote non-standard demands for the script, for shooting, for editing and all creative steps, at the technical level and at the level of organization.”
— Dziga Vertov

“Demand a political art, for political reasons and not artistic ones.”
— Bertolt Brecht


(information for people presenting papers)

The afternoon workshop will feature different papers. These papers will be given by representatives from various groups having conducted one or more experiments relating to the proposed questions. A discussion with the participants will follow; this discussion should lead to a practical proposal.

To this end we have prepared a series of proposed topics dealings with the themes of the workshops and we submit it to you as a working proposition for the preparation of your own paper. Our approach to the major questions of production/distribution/exploitation is slanted towards challenging the existing structures which are the axes of industrial filmmaking.

How films are shown

To open a debate on this subject is to reexamine the conditions under which films are shown. At the same time we are working towards a redefinition of the concept of the movie theatre and the application of this concept.

  • How can we transform the movie theatre? Should the new cinema still be subject to the traditional mechanisms of “exploitation”?
  • What are the different experiments that have been attempted to date? How effective have they been?
  • Should we depend on the present distributing networks, should we create new ones, or can we rely on other existing networks?
  • How can we demystify this aspect of the film process? How can we change the nature of the traditional “movie theatre” to make it into more of a “forum” type of event?
  • This questioning of the movie theatre forces us to question as well the responsibility of the filmmaker towards his film and the public.


The present relationship necessarily involves the box office “syndrome” (distributor/exibitor). At the present time, it is a one-way relationship, as there is rarely any communication between the filmmaker and distributor/exhibitor or between the filmmaker and the public. In the few instances that it occurs, it is strictly of a mercantile nature. The public pays but has no control; they are “consumers”. On the other hand, the filmmaker is limited to his role of “creator”. The triangle is truncated at the base because the essential link between the public and filmmaker is never established or, if so, only artificially through the distributor as intermediary; it is this whole process which mystifies traditional “distribution”.

People’s participation

  • How can we initiate the participation of the “public” in the cinematographic process? How can we plan our work with organizations like unions, citizens’ committees, cooperatives, etc.? How can we coordinate our collective needs? How can we conceive new modes of production in accordance with these needs? Which sectors (unions, people’s organizations, adult and general education) favor a regrouping which would permit a continuity of production.
  • Is it possible to consider this base as the axis of the operation for an Other Cinema.
  • The several experiments in progress on this level can serve as a point of departure to elaborate the beginning of a solution. As least, it would provide a real production base.
  • We must also take into considerations the role that television in its diverse forms (large liberal networks, free networks, educational TV) can play.

Third World cinema

Several practical questions can be raised in relation to the film and filmmakers of the Third World. However, it is less a question here of singling them out than of seeing how they affect our own situation, of seeing to what extent some cinemas in the West are themselves in Third World situations.

  • Which are the questions that continually come to the fore and what practical solutions do they entail? For example, how do we approach the question of exiled filmmakers who must continue to work and bear witness to their national struggles against fascism or the regimes in power? What mechanism could we set up to permit these filmmakers to continue to practice their trade?
  • How, on the other hand, can we go against the economic-cultural grain which prevents certain films from paying their way?
  • To what extent can we benefit from the contradictions of our respective countries, in order to give ourselves a maneuvering margin which will permit of seeing to what extent we can augment our reciprocal collaboration on the level of both diffusion and production.
  • Finally, we should pursue the debate started in Algiers last December and continue the practical work which emerged from this first Rencontre.

 Circulation of prints

The questioning of the various aspects of traditional cinema inevitably lead us to ask questions of a more practical nature.

  • How, for example, do the mechanisms which we are elaborating challenge “classical” distribution? What are the immediate practical problems that will confront us on the level of exchange of prints? Can we “exchange” copies instead of “buying” them in the traditional way? How can we get around/use the use the legalistic tariff barriers.
  • In this context, how can we guarantee financial returns for filmmakers and producers?
  • Can groups act as representatives or agents with these various organizations in order to assure the maximum utilization and earning power of the films? What role can television play on this level?
  • What are the various mechanisms, which are already being experimented with, that we could use or at least coordinate in order to assure these ongoing experiments (which themselves are constantly challenged) a certain continuity?
  • How can our regaining control of distribution assure a real alternative on an economic level?

Cinema as tool for social change

  • How do the present experiments compare with each other?
  • What are the limits of this type of cinema?
  • To what extent can the structures of support of these experiments, both on the level of production and distribution, serve as a maneuvering margin for the permanence of other experiments in progress?

This workshop will be presented by the group Société nouvelle/Challenge for Change, of the National Film Board of Canada. Different groups will present papers.

Third World Cinema Committee

On the occasion of the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma, held in Montreal (Canada) from June 2nd to 8th, 1974, the Third World Filmmakers present wish to reaffirm their resolutions to work towards the constitution of an anti-imperialist cinematographic front at the Third World level.

THEY WOULD LIKE this front to extend to all the progressive cinematographic forces in struggle in the rest of the world against the monopolistic-capitalist cinematographic system.

To this end they could like to recall the main resolutions endorsed by the Third World filmmakers in Algiers in December 1973 and in Buenos Aires in May 1974.

  1. The constitution of the Third World Cinema Committee with an office in Algiers.
  2. The creation of a liaison newsletter.
  3. Elaboration of a catalog of Third World films.
  4. The creation of the FELACI (Federation of Latin American Cineastes) based on the model of the FEPACI (Fédération panafricaine des cinéastes).
  5. Promotion of the exchange and distribution of Third World films.

SUGGESTS the regrouping and the organization of other progressive filmmakers struggling within the existing systems in Western Europe and in North America into one or more federations which would act as representatives and/or correspondents with the Third World federations for the creation of an international anti-imperialist cinematographic front.

SUGGESTS that the CAC (Comité d’action cinématographique) of Montreal which made this meeting possible, carry on its work by the creation of a permanent liaison bureau between progressive filmmakers of the Western countries and their colleagues in the Third World.

This office would accomplish the following tasks:

  • Assemble information coming from progressive filmmakers in Western countries and distribute it through the publication of a regular newsletter.
  • Promote the exchange and distribution of the films from progressive filmmakers in Europe and North America and the filmmakers of the Third World.

WISHES that effective agreements be achieved in the course of the present meeting between the distributors and the filmmakers in Montreal, for the acquisition and distribution of the films screened during this event.

EXPRESSES the wish that similar meetings be held regularly bringing together filmmakers and groups from other parts of the world as well.

Latin American Filmmakers Committee

The Latin American filmmakers present at Montreal on the occasion of the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma from June 2nd to 8th, 1974.


  • The similarities of working conditions in which the Latin American filmmakers exercise their trade, and the limits which are imposed on them by neo-colonialism and imperialism.
  • The identical point of view pertaining to the aspect of cultural decolonization which is a necessary condition for the liberation of our people.
  • Materializing the common aspirations expressed at the meetings of Vina del Mar (Chili) 1967 and 1969, Merida (Venezuela) 1968, Algiers (Algeria) 1973 and Buenos Aires (Argentine) 1974.


  • To create a structural organization which unites the filmmakers of Latin America in their struggle to defend the films and to contribute to the development of Latin American cinema which has resolutely aligned itself on the struggle for liberation at large.
  • The association of Latin American filmmakers wishes to be an organization opened to all filmmakers who, through their works, have expressed a stand against an anti-imperialist cinema, free from cultural alienation.

Fundamental objectives:

  1. Represent the Latin American filmmakers.
  2. Promote and collaborate to the organization of regular meetings between Latin American filmmakers, with film screenings.
  3. Intervene in conflicts between filmmakers and production and/or distribution organization both on a national and international level at the request of members of the association.
  4. Insure the integrity of the films produced by members or of those the association feel are important.
  5. Defend the person of members when they are the victims of repression, jailing or persecution.
  6. The planification of an uninterrupted distribution of films by Latin American filmmakers in each and every country of the continent and in the Third World.
  7. Centralize, coordinate and distribute information on the activities of the Latin American cinema movement and that of other countries in the world which are in a situation of dependency well as those which have similar problems as the Latin American cinema.
  8. Promote the financing and establish contacts between the filmmakers who have access to production funds.
  9. Participate upon request from the filmmakers to the production and distribution agreements in order to guarantee the integrity of the films and of their distribution.
  10. Establish criteria for the commercialization of Latin American films on various markets.
  11. Establish a common cultural policy pertaining to the participation of Latin American cinema to the existing film festivals throughout the world.
  12. Establish relations with other international cinema organization of a cultural and/or professional nature.


Constitute a provisional commission with the purpose of coordinating in assembly of Latin American filmmakers which could take place in 1974 with the objective of creating the definite structure of the association.

The association of Latin American filmmakers wishes the distribution of films, unity of men who are for an engaged cinema and the development of cinema as a tool for truth and liberation; calls on all Latin American filmmakers who think that there is no place nor reason for a cinema which would function outside of the anti-imperialist struggle and for the liberation of all people.


Carlos Carillo (Mexico), Julio Garcia Espinosa (Cuba), Jorge Giannoni (Argentina), Walter Achugar (Uruguay), Carlos Alvarez (Colombia), Alfonso Beato (Brazil), Carlos Gonzalez (Mexico), Miguel Littin (Chili), Sergio Olhovich (Mexico), Edgardo Pallero (Argentina), Dario Pulgar (Chile), Humberto Pios (Argentina), Fernando Solanas (Argentina), Francisco Leon (Cuba), Cosme Alves Neto (Brazil), Jorge Sanjinés (Bolivia), Fédérico Garcia (Peru), Juan Aranibar (Peru), Pedro Rivera (Panama), Modesto Tunon (Panama), Mario Arrieta (Bolivia), Carlos Rebelledo (Venezuela), Mario Handler (Uruguay), Diego de la Tejada (Puerto-Rico), Manuel Perez (Cuba), Sergio Muniz (Brazil), Pedro Chaskel (Chile).

Resolution of United States film workers

Following a suggestion made by representative members of the Third World Cinema Committee, progressive film workers from the United States involved in the areas of production, distribution, exhibition and film criticism, met to discuss the ways in which we could best engage in the world wide movement towards a progressive cinema, and more specifically the ways in which we could best relate to the other already existing organizations, particularly those in the Third World such as the FEPACI, FELACI, and the Third World Cinema Committee. In our meeting we reached the following CONCLUSIONS.


The US participants at the conference did not constitute a representative body of the progressive cinema movement in the US. This movement is geographically spread out in a country of 230 million people; and has within it important differences in approach, emphasis and ideology which reflect in some way the overall political situation in our country. We are aware of our own limitations and the difficulties we will face trying to create an organization comparable to our counter parts in the Third World.


We decide to hold regional preparatory meetings in New York and in San Francisco to discuss the content and objectives of a national conference to be held in the Spring of 1975. Generally we agreed the conference would explore the different areas of cinema work in the US; it would discuss the theoretical and ideological points necessary to reach a basic minimum set of points of agreement; and, finally would evaluate the actual feasibility of constituting an organization of federation of progressive US cinema workers.


We recognize the importance of the diffusion of the progressive cinema of the Third World in the US and we will work in cooperation with the existing organizations already active in this area. Tricontinental Film Center and Third World Newsreel, to produce English versions, distribute and exhibit Third World cinema in the US as part of an overall effort to educate the North American public about the culture and political situations in the Third World. We recognize our special responsibility to the Third World filmmakers to create the conditions so that his or her film will not be relegated to the marginal circuits but shown as widely as possible in a manner which would provide the financial return needed for recuperation and continuing independent production.


We will work for the dissemination of the progressive, socially conscious cinema of the US, particularly the cinema by and about Third World peoples in the US (Afro-Americans, Chicanos, Asian-Americans, Native Americans, etc.) in countries of the Third World and in other advanced industrial nations in Europe and elsewhere.

Working document of the provisional coordinating committee of the cinema workers of European countries and Quebec


It is well known that the dominating structures of film distribution have given birth to multiple and insidious forms of censorship: whether this censorship be moral, political or economical, its objective is to react to a concept of the world which is antagonistic to that of the bourgeoisie. In particular when the cinema incited people to a revolutionary transformation of the social order.

In this perspective it is necessary for us to build an alternative to:

  1. Allow this new cinema to be seen and fulfill its function.
  2. Assure it’s producers the economical continuity of their political work with film.

Consequently our task is the following:

  • Give answer to an increasing demand for a cinema closer to reality to the aspirations and the struggle of the people.
  • Develop and structure a solid alternative network.
  • Increase the screening possibilities by mobilizing groups and/or persons in search of a tool for social change.
  • Improve the organization at the level of print circulation.
  • Facilitate the exchange of information on new films and the use which is made of them.
  • Establish a type of “network based on common understanding” among the different groups (agree on certain criteria on the political and economical level: open books, screenings reports, etc.).

These are the reasons why the filmmakers and film users from Europe and Quebec meeting in Montreal on the occasion of the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma express their will to coordinate their work.

Uniting these groups (and/or individuals) on the basis of common objectives and the choice of a certain way of working.


  • Change the “rapport” between film and public. Film should be considered as a tool for political change. It should accomplish both, a cultural and political work at the base.
  • Fight against mercantile cinema based on profit making: against film as a consumer object and product of the dominating culture. For a social cinema, for a political cinema dedicated to the struggle of the people.

The following text is a first step towards the materialization of this regrouping. It was endorsed during the Montreal meeting by the various groups present. However it was not undersigned because of the absence of certain important groups and/or certain countries concerned. This text is the basis for a future common program.


An international coordination must be closely linked to the specific practice of each group. This should influence and mark the regrouping in question. It is in this sense only that it will be efficient.

The first program should then contain practical resolutions based as much on political options as on the choice of a certain way of working.


Thierry Coene, Unité de distribution, Belgium; Carl Henrik Svenstedt, Film Centrum, Sweden.

Project for a program

The individuals engaged in film work as a means to develop the revolutionary consciousness in Western Europe and in Quebec, meeting in Montreal on the occasion of the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma insist on the necessity to create a cinematographic front against imperialistic and neocapitalistic use of the audio-visual.


1. The refusal to distribute films and among those the majority of the films from the Third World, which differentiate themselves or are in total opposition to the marketed models by which the people are turned away from the consciousness of their exploitation and their oppression.

2. The manipulation of the films which penetrate by chance (or otherwise) the barrier of the commercial circuit, and even that of some marginal ones, by giving these films a “marketable” value as exotic objects in a democratic society.


  1. Contribute to the formation of a critical consciousness facing the products circulated by the monopolistic system indentical to the dominating ideology.
  2. Promote, facilitate, and activate the diffusion through adequate means, of all the films which present themselves asa liberation tool and/or as a tool for the change of our society, while a struggling against all recuperation commercial or other.

All this is part of a larger struggle in which we are all united with the African and Latin American comrades, as those of the Third World at large. This struggle should have as a fundamental cinematographic option, the taking over of all the means of production and diffusion of films, and in a more immediate future, the union of the “free screens” and the creation of new means of cinematographic action.


Amongst the persons meeting in Montreal it has been agreed that:

  1. The Comité d’action cinématographique of Montreal should be maintained with the aim of organizing and coordinating the exchange of information of films between the various world federations.
  2. That a first meeting of the concerned countries be held in Pesarofrom September 12th to 19th, 1974 (contact: Lino Micciché, Via Della Stelletta. 23; 00186 Roma, Italia. Tel: 657-340- 657-598. Telex: Nuovocine-Roma).
    That a second meeting be held probably in Brussels in early 1975 to be organized by the Unité de distribution (contact: Micheline Creteur, 32 ave. Van Becelaere; 1170 Brussels. Tel: Office: 13.94.40 ext. 124, Private: 73.30.24, Unité de distribution: 734.93.86).
  1. That each group establish an information dossier giving its political, practical and cultural analyses of the situation at the national level before the meetings.
    Each group should send any amendments and/or counter proposals of program before mid-august. They should be sent to Micheline Creteur in order that each group could be informed about them.
    Aquestionnaire will be sent by the end of June by the Unité de distribution.

A new type of critic for a new type of cinema

The film critics present at the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma in Montreal from June 2nd to 8th, 1974, are planning the organization of a colloquium around the theme: “A new type of critic for a new type of cinema”, the concept of which should be developed around the following four directions:

  1. Denounce and protest the area of “film culturism and/or buffism and promote a militant critic which denounces the ideology of established cinemas and defends the progressive cinemas.
  2. Abolish the concept of “great cinema” (American, French, Italian) and “small cinemas” necessarily confined to a form of “provincialism”.
  3. Give priority to the political criteria to the detriment of abstract aesthetical ones, contribute to and promote a new aesthetics based on marxism.
  4. Create new publications, new poles of reflection, coming from progressive forces on all continents.


USA: Harold D. Weaver Jr., Third World Morning Images Project; Gary Crowdus, Cinéaste; Julia Lesage, Women and Films; John Hess, Jump Cut.
QUEBEC:Jean-Pierre Tadros, Cinéma Quebec, Alain Berson, Champ libre; Pierre Vallières, Cinéma Quebec; Michel Vézina, CKRL-FM Quebec; André Pâquet; Pierre Véronneau, Stratégie.
FRANCE: Guy Hennebelle, Écran 74, Afrique Asie, Serge Le Péron.
ITALY: Lino Micciché, Cinema 60; Guido Aristacro, Cinema Nuovo.
CHILE: Erik Martinez, Prime Plano.
TUNISIA: Férid Boughedir, Jeune Afrique; Tahar Cheriaa.
SWEDEN:Carl Henrik Svenstedt, Film and TV.
BELGIUM: Marian Handwerker, Contre-champ; Robbe de Hert.

Declaration presented during the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma

  • Canada took 20 years to recognize the government of Red China, but 20 hours to recognize the dictatorship of Greece and Chile.
  • After having collaborated with the USA for the massacre of one million Vietnamese, our country still refuses, today, to give visas to members of the PRG, which is a government recognized by the Paris treaty.
  • We continue to provide arms and other assistance to governments which assassinate liberation movement of developing countries.
  • All year long we show commercial films for corporations which exploit and bleed the Third World; but we refuse to distribute films which show the struggle and suffering of people in the Third World.
  • We claim to be a democratic country but we censor the ideas of a larger and larger part of the population. Many films made by Quebec filmmakers are presently censored for political reasons. We are making still another step towards a degradation of democracy which will one day lead us to fascism.
  • As Quebec and Canadian filmmakers we protest any form of censorship in our country as elsewhere. We demand the free circulation of the films we make with and for our people, our country, and abroad.


  • That our government makes the necessary pressure to obtain the liberation of filmmakers and other persons which have been jailed for political reasons in Chile and elsewhere.
  • That our country supports the efforts of progressive cinemas of the Third World and that this aid be part of its program to developing countries.
  • That Quebec and Canadian Filmmakers be in solidarity with their colleagues from the Third World in the struggle against all forms of censorship and slavery which prevent the circulation of films as that of ideas.


Michel Régnier, cinéaste. Robin Spry, cinéaste. Michael Rubbo, cinéaste. Martin Defalco, cinéaste. Maurice Bulbulian, cinéaste. Richard Lavoie, cinéaste. André Melançon, cinéaste. Hélène Girard, Cinéaste. Martin Duckworth, cinéaste. Jean-Claude Labrecque, cinéaste. Francis Mankiewicz, cinéaste. Anne-Claire Poirier, cinéaste. Claude Lefebvre, cinéaste. Pierre Bemier, cinéaste. Pierre Hébert, cinéaste. Michel Gauthier. Kirwan Cox, Canadian Council of Filmmakers. Sandra Gathercole, Toronto Filmmakers’ Coop.

Declaration Chile

The participants at the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma which took place in Montreal from June 2nd to 8th, 1974 concerning the political events in Chile express the following:

  1. We condemn with force the assassinations, tortures and arbitrary imprisonments that the Chilean people suffer day after day. This repression through crime affects the Chilean proletariat which is an exemplary force for other liberation movements throughout the world.
  2. We are conscious that the struggle of the Chilean proletariat will not end today. That its capacity to struggle, its class consciousness it’s courage cannot be disturbed by any fascist movement, no matter how brutal. Today as always we express our solidarity with the Chilean people, we engage in their struggle which is the struggle for the liberation of all the Third World.
  3. We demand the liberation of all Chilean political prisoners. We demand that crimes against those whose only offence was to fight for a just and sovereign homeland, be stopped.
  4. We engage ourselves to struggle for the immediate liberation of the following comrades, actors and filmmakers imprisoned for several months and who have been savagely tortured. They are: Marcello Romo, Guillermo Cahn, Ivan San Martin, Elsa Rudolphy, Francisco Morales, Hugo Medina, Enrique Berrio, Pedro Atias.

The struggle of the Chilean people is the struggle of all the people of the world.


We wish to inform you of the following:


  1. The Chilean situation after the military coup of September 11th, 1973 and the conditions under which cultural activities must develop, submitted to all sorts of restrictions which prevent their realization, or, which is worst, distort and/or debase them.
  2. The total persecution and the repression which affects the people and of course the filmmakers.
  3. The impossibility to accomplish, even with a minimum of efficiency and of honesty, the task of a cinematheque under these conditions.
  4. The urgency to see to the conservation of a mass of cinematographic material which constitutes works and which bears invaluable witness to Chilean reality.

We have decided to re-initiate the work undertaken in Chile through the Cinemathèque universitaire interrupted and prevented by the military intervention, by establishing the CHILEAN CINEMATHEQUE IN EXILE in La Habana, Cuba and its work has started April 30th, 1974, under the direction of the undersigned.

The task of the Chilean Cinematheque in Exile is to gather see cinematographic material from or on Chile for its preservation, classification archival and distribution purposes.

We hope to maintain, in the future, the most cordial relations with progressive filmmakers of the world and we thank in advance all those who will bring their collaboration to the accomplishment of our task.

Peter Chaskel B.
Calle 23 no. 1155, La Habana 4, Cuba.





Political resolution

The progressive workers of cinema from the Third World, Europe and North America present at the Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma in Montreal from June 2nd to 8th, 1974.

DENOUNCE the intervention of imperialism and its allies in Latin America, Africa and Asia.

DENOUNCE the Zionist aggression against the Arab people of the Middle East.

DENOUNCE the repression hitting the cultural workers of the arts and culture in Chile and Palestine.

SUPPORT the struggle of the people which are fighting for total independence in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

SUPPORT the claims of the workers oppressed by the capitalist-imperialistic system in Europe, North America as in the fascist dictatorship of Spain and Greece.

Ce texte est issu du cahier no 1 des Rencontres de Montréal : Comité d’action cinématographique (Québec). Cahiers des Rencontres internationales pour un nouveau cinéma. Montréal : Comité d’action cinématographique, 1975, 4 vol. Bibliogr. ; Ill. Cote PN 1993.4 R39

Revenir en haut de la page