Journals Showcase (Witryna Czasopism.pl)

Those one hundred dollar are the budget of the Polish Film Institute, composed of fees from cinemas’ owners, distribution companies, TV stations . They transfer 1,5% of their revenue. Who and for who transfers those money? Agnieszka Odorowicz heads this institution but there is also an eleven-member council with tree-year tenure which has some of the entitlements of supervisory board and programming policy. People connected with the film trade – distributors, producers, directors are included in this institution. There is a lack of representatives of critics. The scientific environment is represented by prof. Wiesław Godzic who takes notice of mistakes in the bill which are dubious about the clarity of the Polish Film Institution’s work.

Another trouble connected to film theory is that it is so heterogeneous, divided into the historical and the theoretical part, with the analytical part squashed somewhere between the two. Much as historicists are more or less active, since there are countless amounts of new or not so new films to deal with, theorists have become totally flaccid. Those more vigorous have already historicized their work or combined it with the media theory. Film historicists at least ask who killed Laura Palmer, whereas theorists do not even think of taking interest in the fate of Ernest Wild. It is a pity, because from among all Polish film theorist, he is the one who deserves a little Golden Palm for a small but eminent entirety. What results from the situation is that in “Panoptikum” one can read, in between the lines, about the sad fate of Lynch’s heroine but nothing about Wild.