Ararat marks Atom Egoyan’s third consecutive film to open the Toronto International Film Festival. The drama premiered at Cannes – out of competition, by the director’s request – and has stirred up a hornet’s nest of international debate. Written and directed by Egoyan, the film, named after a dormant volcano in Turkey, tells the story of a contemporary director struggling with the production of a movie about the Armenian Genocide.

A historical event not commonly known in North America, the 1915 genocide involved the systematic elimination of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians at the hands of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. However, the Turkish government does not acknowledge that the massacre actually happened and Turkish communities worldwide have protested the film.

Produced by Serendipity Point Films’ Robert Lantos and Egoyan, the drama, budgeted at a reported $12 million, stars newcomer David Alpay, Charles Aznavour, Christopher Plummer, Eric Bogosian (who, like Egoyan and Aznavour, is of Armenian descent), Brent Carver, Marie-Josee Croze and Bruce Greenwood. Alliance Atlantis Films has worldwide rights to the film, which is being released through Miramax in the U.S.

Egoyan spoke with Playback in anticipation of Ararat’s North American premiere at TIFF.

Playback: Is it safe to say Ararat is your biggest production to date?

Egoyan: Yes. We had to recreate history because of the film within the film, and we wanted to do it as carefully as possible. It’s a very unusual period to recreate because it hasn’t really been shown before. There’s no place you can go and rent your costumes en masse. Everything had to be handmade.

Playback: Were you surprised by the controversial reception at Cannes?

Egoyan: It was stirring up controversy before we got to Cannes. It’s a very unusual event, because the Turkish government systematically denies [the Armenian Genocide] ever happened, and they’ve taken a very aggressive stance. Last January, there was a massive campaign aimed at preventing distribution of the movie. It sort of came to a head in Cannes. Once people see it, though, they understand that while it takes as a given that this event occurred, it really is a film dealing with the present day and how people continue to live with this.

Playback: Are you happy to now be bringing Ararat to TIFF, which by its nature is not as competitive as Cannes?

Egoyan: I’m hugely excited about Toronto for another reason, which is that I think in all of the controversy around the film, in most people’s minds it’s something to do with Armenians and Turks, but in fact the movie is entirely set in Toronto. It’s about living in this city and it’s about notions of tolerance and fair-mindedness. [The Opening Night Gala] is going to be an important evening because I think it’s an opportunity for the city to reclaim this movie. It’s also, as far as I know, the first film set in Toronto to open the festival.

Playback: The daily press has played up the rivalry between you and David Cronenberg in terms of vying for the Opening Night Gala for your respective films. How do you react to that hoopla?

Egoyan: It is hoopla. David’s a mentor of mine, and I think most people should know that, and certainly I know David does. To anyone aspiring to make films in this country, he is a hero, so I have a huge respect for him and we’re friends. As our careers have both become more visible, there have been moments that have been over-observed, and I think that often there is a sense of rivalry that is projected where it doesn’t actually exist. I think he put it best when he said, ‘We’re both working from the same side of the barricades.’

I do think that the festival had to make a tough choice, and I haven’t seen David’s film Spider yet, so I can’t comment, but I do think that Ararat is very much a film that’s set in this city, and there was probably a consideration of how that would play with an opening-night audience.

Playback: When you heard that Ararat was chosen for the Opening Night Gala, and when you’ve heard that with other films, do you suddenly feel some kind of responsibility because on opening night audiences are in a festive mood? Do you feel that this might not be the best way to show the film?

Egoyan: I definitely felt that with The Sweet Hereafter and Felicia’s Journey (laughs). It sounds strange to think a film about genocide might have a different response, but I do think that this film is not as downbeat or ambiguous as those other movies might be. It’s pretty clear about where the characters are arriving at the end and what decisions they’ve made. And those decisions are really emotionally invested and can be shared.

Playback: How important is it to find the right festival placement for a film?

Egoyan: The Adjuster (1991) was a gala, which was a huge mistake, because it was definitely not a film for a gala audience, which then put Exotica (1994) back into a regular screening at Perspective Canada. The festival people have hard decisions to make, going back to the question of Spider versus Ararat. That was probably a very carefully made decision – you know, what best serves the movie.

Playback: What has TIFF meant to you in the past?

Egoyan: It’s where I was discovered, so it means a huge amount. I started as a journalist at the student newspaper and I started covering the festival in those days. I remember dreaming about having a film in the festival, and I remember submitting a short and having it rejected, and Bruce McDonald and I then showing our rejected shorts out on the street with a generator and a hand-cranked projector.

And then the thrill of getting that first feature [1984’s Next of Kin] in. That was also the year Perspective Canada was launched. I might be the only person who thinks of the Canadian film industry as glamorous, as a residual effect of that year (laughs).

Playback: Finally, do you think Telefilm’s goal of Canadian films accounting for 5% of the domestic box office is achievable?

Egoyan: It is entirely dependent on our luck with a couple of films. No one knows what will or won’t work – it’s the golden rule of film distribution. And if we are lucky, if we have a few Men with Brooms in a given year and if that combines with a couple of larger movies that are more designed to secure a market, then I guess it’s attainable. It’s just as easily not attainable, and we shouldn’t despair about that. It’s just the luck of the draw. So many films get released every year, and if we want to continue making films as a cultural industry, we have to be prepared for risk.