, producer, head of the Social Programs Department of the Roscongress Foundation, lecturer at Gerasimov Institute of Cinematography (VGIK), and former Deputy Director of the Department of Cinema and Digital Development of the Ministry of Culture.

Currently the state support is segmented – there are areas of support for entertainment films made for commercial distribution; auteur cinema – the so-called art of cinema, where the skill level prevails over the commercial potential; documentary film; animation. Social impact films can fall under any of these categories, so allocating them under a separate segment, as done by the Ministry of culture, is, according to the expert, more of a PR move, focusing on the fact that the films receiving state support must produce a certain impact on the society.

“I think the most obvious assessment property of social impact cinema is the audience size. We are not concerned about revenue generated, or awards given – the key is that as many people as possible watch the film, and, more often than not, it’s about a specific target audience. And unlike entertainment and auteur films, the success of which is determined in the first weeks and months of its life, the influence of social impact films can be assessed after a very long time. Probably the best example is the film “Doctor Lisa” – it gathered a huge audience, and the “Fair Help” foundation has confirmed that hundreds of people joined them as volunteers after seeing the picture,” Galina Sytsko says.

The President and the Government of the Russian Federation regularly give orders for systemic support of films dedicated to socially impactful topics, and for development of the National Cinematography Development Concept. The drafts of the Concept focus heavily on the issues of support and assessment of socially important content, but because all the KPIs have become unpredictable since February 2022, Galina Sytsko believes we should not expect the Concept to be adopted any time soon. Moreover, the thesis about increasing state support for cinematography is quite debatable, because while formally the funds allocated by the state are indeed increasing, these efforts are in fact aimed not at making more films, but rather at preventing a drop in their numbers. “There’s always inflation, rising production costs, catastrophic losses of the film industry in the years of the pandemic and a further drop last year, the problems of attracting extra-budgetary funding, equipment, supplies, software and unpredictable currency exchange rates,” the expert explains.

We can definitely be confident about the feasibility of assessing the impact of children’s cinema, because in this case, we could and should use the tools from pedagogy and child psychology. In addition, this year there will be a significant change in the system – the maximum public funding limit of children’s films will be raised from 70 % to 100 %. Accordingly, producers will no longer have to be concerned about economic performance, so we are hoping there will be more high quality films aimed specifically at children. But since the film production cycle is 2–3 years, the effect of this law will not become clear until 2026.

Galina Sytsko also believes that the production of films popularizing the professions of teachers, engineers, doctors, etc. will gain momentum in the near future. The effect of such films can be measured by comparing the percentage of school graduates entering specialized universities, or by comparing the age profile of those who work in a particular profession now and some years later.