It is getting harder and harder to find what is actually worth watching

An interview with Mariola Marczak, PhD, DSc, film scholar and academic lecturer

Mariola Marczak, PhD, DSc, is a professor at the University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn and a member of ecumenical juries at international film festivals on behalf of SIGNIS: the World Catholic Association for Communication, including Locarno (2019), Terni (2019), and Cannes (2022). She served as Director of the Institute of Journalism and Social Communication from 2018 to 2019 and as Editor-in-Chief of the journal „Media-Kultura-Komunikacja Społeczna” (Media-Culture-Social Communication) from 2018 to 2021.

What or who got you interested in film in the first place?

During the communist era in Poland, sources of cultural education were scarce, but the level of cultural content in the media was high. Television provided access to the greatest achievements of world cinema through programs like „Filmoteka Arcydzieł”, hosted by the eminent film and television historian and author Jacek Fuksiewicz, who later lectured in France, among other places. I attended the ZA Film Discussion Club, which was run at the time by Konrad Lenkiewicz. The High School No. 1 in Olsztyn, which I also attended, collaborated with the club during a period when it received the Polish Federation of Film Discussion Clubs’ award for the best club of its kind in Poland. It was during this time that I caught the film bug. Even as a 14-year-old at the Awangarda cinema, I was captivated by the quality of films such as Krzysztof Zanussi’s „Spiral” and Peter Weir’s „Picnic at Hanging Rock”. The Film Discussion Club offered an ambitious and diverse repertoire, spanning both classics and the latest releases. It was impossible not to fall in love with cinema.

Do you prefer feature-length or short films? And why?

Like most people, I prefer feature-length narrative films because they are more complex, give artists greater scope, and carry greater communicative potential. In my research, I focus on religious and metaphysical cinema. It is a genre of film that can be visually striking, filled with rich metaphors, symbols, and understatement, compelling the viewer to think. Short films can also be an effective tool for artistic and social communication in the hands of a talented artist, but longer formats resonate with me more deeply.

What is your favourite film?

There are truly so many of them. It really depends on where I am in life and my mood at the time. But a few that immediately come to mind are „Picnic at Hanging Rock”, „Some Like It Hot”, „The Desert of the Tartars”, „Babette’s Feast”, and „The Thin Red Line”.

Why are Krzysztof Zanussi and his films at the heart of your academic research?

Firstly, for personal reasons, as I grew up with Zanussi’s films. I watched many of them on television as a child. Behind the Wall was an intimate drama improvised on set by actors Maja Komorowska and Zbigniew Zapasiewicz, which moved me so deeply that I remembered it for years. As I mentioned, „Spiral” was probably the first film I watched at the Awangarda arthouse cinema in Olsztyn. It was shocking because it depicted dying in a hospital setting with raw realism and existential drama. Secondly, for professional reasons. I saw it as a task that needed to be done, since a director whose films had been awarded almost all over the world, including Cannes, Locarno, and Venice, did not yet have a comprehensive monograph. Preparing the book took a long time and required an immense amount of work, as the director already had around eighty films to his name at that point, and the existing literature had to be researched in several languages. There was a lot of material to go through, but I succeeded.

In March of this year, two lead actors withdrew from Krzysztof Zanussi’s film „From Dust to Dust”. What are your thoughts on this?

It was completely unacceptable behaviour. Krzysztof Zanussi is a master of European and Polish cinema who has made many outstanding, highly original films. At least several of them played a massive role not only culturally, but also socially and even politically. I am referring primarily to „Camouflage”, which immediately drew an audience of millions upon its release because, as people said at the time, Zanussi said out loud on screen what people were whispering in private. „The Contract” and „The Constant Factor”, both produced in 1980, were also important films that offered a critical commentary on the reality of communist Poland. Throwing obstacles in the path of a veteran of Polish cinema and delivering a snub to an artist with such an extraordinary body of work – achievements those refusing him couldn’t even dream of – is deeply disrespectful.

The Senate of the Republic of Poland declared 2026 the Year of Masters, honouring Andrzej Wajda – marking a century since his birth and a decade since his passing – and Krzysztof Kieślowski, on the thirtieth anniversary of his death. Did you know Andrzej Wajda personally? What was this world-renowned director like?

I met him toward the end of his life at the 40th anniversary of film studies in Kraków. Following a screening of a documentary film about art, there was a Q&A session with him. It was a small group, with just several dozen people attending. The event took place at the Manggha Museum of Japanese Art and Technology, an institution Wajda himself had spearheaded. However, I didn’t have a close personal relationship with him. He is a living legend and a monumental figure in history. An artist of immense talent, though like any filmmaker, his career had different phases, including a few missteps. My favourite quote of his is that a film director needs to be like both a corporal and a poet – an artist who must simultaneously rule the film crew with an iron fist.

Outside one of the district offices in Warsaw, you can read that American director and screenwriter Martin Scorsese once said he learned cinema by watching Wajda’s films and considered „Ashes and Diamonds” to be one of the most important works in the history of film. Was he right?

Yes, absolutely. „Ashes and Diamonds” is an outstanding masterpiece deeply rooted in Poland’s complex history. It is a rich source of visual imagery, possessing immense communicative power through its cinematography as well as extraordinary myth-making force. It created the enduring archetype of the Home Army generation – shaping how they were perceived – and turned Zbigniew Cybulski into an icon.
Is it possible to compare Wajda’s „Ashes and Diamonds” (1958) and Zanussi’s „Illumination” (1973)?
No, because the plots of both films address entirely different eras. Wajda’s protagonist emerged directly from the trauma of the war, whereas Zanussi’s character lived in the normal, post-war reality. The filmmakers themselves are also completely different. Wajda is emotional and traditional, while Zanussi is a calm intellectual, and „Illumination” takes the original, truly unique form of a film essay.

What kind of values do we find in the films of Wajda, Kieślowski, and Zanussi, and would you say they have a universal appeal?

The films of all three filmmakers were generally rooted in Polish reality – though they all worked abroad as well, Wajda occasionally – yet most of their work can be interpreted through the lens of universal values. They address issues fundamental to human existence: the individual’s confrontation with history, with their own mortality and fragility, or with ethical choices. Kieślowski sparked lively debates across almost all of Europe, particularly in France, with his television series „Decalogue”. He was a seeker, an agnostic. Wajda remained mostly outside of religion, though he acknowledged Christianity as a cultural tradition. Zanussi, on the other hand, is a devout practising Catholic. So, while their worldviews and artistic styles differ, all three undeniably appeal to universal values.

Does pursuing a career as a film critic or filmmaker actually pay off today?

As Zanussi puts it: “It doesn’t pay off, but it’s worth it.” You have to be a professional critic and strive for objectivity. It is worth preparing yourself for this profession in order to evaluate films substantively and to know the body of world cinema, so you have a point of reference. Critics are very much needed and always will be. Due to the ever-increasing volume of audiovisual production, it is getting harder and harder to find what is actually worth watching. Therefore, critics acting as guides through the film repertoire will be needed for a long time to come, to professionally and concisely describe and evaluate films, and thereby make it easier for viewers to choose.