As Hot Docs kicks off its 31st edition in Toronto this week, it’s virtually impossible to banish the thought that the 2024 event may be the last.

This grim possibility is one that the organization itself floated last week, in a public statement decrying the Canadian federal government’s decision to not provide the financially strapped doc festival with emergency funding within a $120 million package of aid to screen arts organizations.

While still ailing from the dramatic downturn in attendance brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, Hot Docs has also been plagued by internal strife. In March, 10 programmers announced their immediate departure from the organization en masse — an exodus that was followed by a statement from Hot Docs that the recently appointed artistic director, Hussain Currimbhoy, had stepped down from his role for “personal reasons.”

Subsequent reporting by the Toronto Star, which obtained an internal communication from the 10 programmers to Hot Docs management, indicated that Currimbhoy was one of the driving forces in creating the “toxic” work environment that the programmers alleged in a joint public statement.

Understandably, albeit unfortunately, the turmoil at Hot Docs has tended to overshadow the actual films screening in the 2024 event, which the departed programmers stressed that they “fully support and celebrate” even as they summarily cut their ties with the festival. Speaking with Playback sister publication Realscreen, programming director Heather Haynes (pictured left) — who is leading the now-depleted programming department for this year’s festival — sought to further that refocusing on Hot Docs’ raison d’être, while also using the organization’s ongoing drama to reflect on challenges facing the documentary field more broadly.

This interview has been edited for clarity and concision.

With this edition of the festival a number of new programming categories have been introduced, and some others dropped. How did this affect the programming strategy?

Heather Haynes: I wouldn’t say they really affected the programming strategy that much. For instance, we used to have like 20 films in [the] Artscapes [program], and we thought it would be good to break up larger categories into smaller sections so it would easier to spotlight the films. So a lot of Artscapes got broken up into the new Art of Resistance and Pop/Life categories, and of course we have those kinds of films that are programmed throughout the other sections of the festival.

Another new category this year is the Emergence strand, covering films that are dealing with AI. What are some of the attitudes you can gauge towards the technology in these works? Is there a balance between fear and optimism?

Haynes: I think we’ve got a little bit of both. For instance, if you look at Eno and how Gary [Hustwit] is infusing AI into an artistic approach to making the film; or Love Machina, which is a love story in AI, about the need to preserve your loved one and have them around. What that film does that I think is very interesting is it talks about how technology and interfaces have been built primarily from a white patriarchal male perspective, and asks how can we begin to change this and make these technologies more democratic – which I think is a really important theme that we need to start addressing.

Beyond these thematic categories, what are some other broader currents you’ve detected in this year’s program overall?

Haynes: There are obviously a lot of films on protest, environmental issues, women’s issues. Another thing is that, right now, with so many things that are happening in the world, a lot of filmmakers are having to leave their countries of origin and work [elsewhere]. Maybe this isn’t the perfect word for this, but there seem to be a lot of filmmakers in exile right now — and we’re not only seeing that [as a theme] within the films, the subject matter, but also in the reality of the filmmakers.

What do you think are some of the real discoveries in the program?

Haynes: There’s a lot within the Canadian section, which is really strong this year. Yintah (pictured top) from EyeSteelFilm, which is directed by Jennifer Wickham, Brenda Michell and Michael Toledano, which is about the Wet’suwet’en protest and how hereditary, traditional chiefs have stood up to defend their land, is a really incredible documentary.

And then there’s Singing Back the Buffalo from Tasha Hubbard, [who has] been working for a long time on the rematriation of buffalo to the land — which is actually an important environmental necessity, because as they move over the land they pack down the native grasses and plants that grow, and that helps to bring nutrients back to the soil. Tasha always puts herself within her films and leads her audiences through her stories through her presence, and I think this film is a real gem.

There’s more non-fiction film being made these days than ever before, yet as we’ve been seeing, the market for it seems to have cooled. Do you think that there’s an increasing divergence between the kind of socially conscious and/or artistically ambitious documentary filmmaking that Hot Docs has always celebrated, and the kinds of content — and I use the term advisedly — that is attracting buyers from networks and streamers?

Haynes: I do a lot of traveling, to festivals of course, but also to work with filmmakers, largely in Latin America. And the filmmakers [there] are [telling] stories [about] urgent issues around their countries, human rights issues, a lot of very strong women’s rights issues are now coming out from Latin America. So my hope is that at some points these works will be supported more, and it will be understood that these are the stories that they need to create.

Last year in [the top 20 of] our audience awards, there were some very strong and powerful films about human rights, genocide, women’s issues — so, in terms of our audiences at Hot Docs, these are the stories they’re coming to. That doesn’t mean that we don’t need lighter stories as well, because we have to have that balance. But I think audiences want to be informed about what is happening in the world. And this is why I think festivals are still so important, because we have the ability to bring the filmmakers and the audiences together.

How do you think the organizational challenges that Hot Docs is facing right now reflect broader challenges that the documentary field as a whole is facing?

Haynes: [Laughs] How many ways? I don’t want to speak too much for other festivals and what they’re going through, but one of the challenges we have had here in Toronto is, we lived through another lockdown that a lot of cities didn’t have, and that really impacted our first hybrid festival. And audiences returning to the festival have been a little slower in Toronto, because people are still nervous about COVID, and people had a different kind of shell shock in this city. Also, we are facing rising prices for venues, rentals, hotels, which is making it very difficult for us to function in the way we used to.

Do you think that festivals can still serve a valuable purpose in getting these kinds of works in front of people? What’s your forecast for the festival sector over the next few years?

Haynes: I remember during COVID when filmmakers would have their world premieres online, and they were saying that they had no connection to the audiences — they didn’t know how their films were being received, they didn’t have that direct impact, they couldn’t really have the conversations [with audiences about] what’s working, what’s not. And I know there was a lot of [talk] at that time that “festivals are dead”, but for the filmmakers, I don’t think that’s the case — and for the audiences [as well], and the participants that are in the films. So, I’m an optimist [on this], but I do think we need to re-evaluate how we function, and that’s going to take some broad conversations and some time.

This story originally appeared in Realscreen

Images courtesy of Hot Docs