There were a lot of themes at this year’s Berlin International Film Festival and some resonated deeply with me, as the world tries to wade through the perils of certainty — those who think they always know better.

I woke up to an interesting read on the NY Times, about the palpable theme of doubt at this year’s Berlinale. While I agree with the writer about critics having been rewarded for being opinionated, I also question the absence, in her piece, of one film I found most important at this year’s festival. It is Amos Gitai’s Shikun, which best points out the perils of certainty and approaching difficult world issues with a heavy foot. Gitai’s film is inspired by Eugène Ionesco’s play Rhinoceros, though it approaches the idea from a different POV.

The polarizing theme at the center of Ionesco’s work "Humanism is dead, those who follow it are just old sentimentalists," remains, though the protagonist is played by French actress Irene Jacob, a frequent collaborator of the Israeli filmmaker. Is it easier to stomp around with fixed ideas and taking a permanent side? Or are we better off, personally and in relation to the world, when we allow our consciousness to guide us, using instincts and logic instead of rhetoric? Those are questions that Gitai asks frequently in his work and honestly, if someone like him could be a leader for his homeland, we would all be living in a much better world right now. I wrote about Shikun before the festival, calling it an “exercise in peace” — something we should all try sometime — and will feature interviews with both Gitai and Jacob on these pages soon.

I found it puzzling that the article about the Berlinale didn’t mention at all Gitai’s film, or the Palestinian-Israeli collective documentary No Other Land which walked away with both a Best Documentary Award as well as a Panorama Audience Award at this year’s festival.

Is it that the media cannot talk about uncertainty when it comes to the Israel Gaza issue? Or even when it comes to Israel and its awful, fundamentalist leadership of the extreme right? Whatever the reason, omitting Gitai’s thoughtful, laden with meaning and fully political (though always done with a cinematic touch) work is a dangerous oversight. As is not mentioning a much-needed work which brings together four peacemakers with a camera.

In my years writing about the MENA region, I’ve found a lot of people who were quite sure of themselves. Some of the same people who today cry out for what is happening in Gaza, were at one point calling Hamas “the biggest problem for the Palestinian people.” Yet today, if I were to have that conversation with any of them, they would call me an Israeli sympathizer.

And film critics go a step further, often addressing films as “good” or “bad” thus not allowing for an opinion different from theirs when discussing cinema. As a recent example, I had just finished watching the delicious Black Tea by Abderrahmane Sissako, when a friend came over to tell me how awful the film was. My immediate impulse was to fight back with superlatives, when really, I still needed time to process the work and ideas that had been placed before me. Anyway, art is always a personal journey and should be interpreted by each human being individually, so why attack each other with superlatives or putdowns… Breathe, realize the lessons you’ve learned and take the work with you on a journey. If you come out of it better, then that film is worthwhile. Don’t you think?

I think what the NY Times piece calls “doubt” I’ve always called living in shades of grey. Most of our lives are lived in that grey area, because none of us are angels and most of us aren’t devils — we exist somewhere in the middle. Not all people who die were saints in their lives. Sometimes the dead did something bad, and most times the living are trying to figure out how to be good. Each person, each moment and each move needs to be examined with an analytical mindset, so we can then come up with our own individual answers. Looking to the media, and even more dangerously social media to form an opinion will only lead to… well, the kind of world we find ourselves in. Full of extremist viewpoints and those who are willing to shoot the peacemakers.

I always loved the below quote from British philosopher and pacifist Bertrand Russell. It is the header of my X (formerly Twitter) profile and I never get tired of reading it.

So back to the Berlinale. After all is said and done, I will miss Carlo Chatrian’s touch as the festival’s Artistic Director. He has a poetry to his way of handling and choosing cinema. This year’s program, of course put together alongside his numerous programming team, proved that. While this is his last Berlinale, and Tricia Tuttle will take over starting in March, I look forward to what Chatrian has in store for cinema lovers. I don’t doubt for a minute it will be something equally as magical as what has preceded it.

The themes of death, or rather Dying, one of my favorite titles in the line up for several reasons, but also coming to terms with our choices, often made in haste and without giving ourselves a choice, made my own Berlinale magical. I personally reconnected with my German heritage, in a cultural way and discovered a new addiction, the work of Lars Eidinger. Just wait for the profile I’ll have on him in the very near future, and put Reiner Holzemer’s Lars Eidinger — To Be Or Not To Be, a wondrous documentary about the German thespian, on your watchlist. NOW! And Matthias Glasner got a Silver Bear for Best Screenplay for his thought-provoking Sterben (Dying), in Competition at this year’s Berlinale.

Did I agree with the choices of the jury? For the first time in a long long while, I did, almost completely. Particularly with the choice of Golden Bear for Best Film, Mati Diop’s Dahomey. Read my review of the film on ICSFilm.org.

For the complete list of winners, check out this PDF from the Berlinale. And remember, there are no losers where cinema is concerned.

Top image courtesy of the Berlinale, used with permission.